Jump to content

Harper's socially moderate image under attack


Recommended Posts

Harper's socially moderate image under attack

Despite his best efforts to portray the new Conservative Party as socially moderate, Stephen Harper is coming under attack on a range of divisive issues, from abortion to the death penalty.

At a news conference in Hamilton Thursday, reporters asked Harper to clarify his earlier statement that a government led by him would not table legislation to tighten Canada's abortion laws in its first term.

When he was pressed to reveal whether he would let such a law slip into Parliament by some other means, Harper was frank.

"Absolutely... I would generally continue the practice of allowing free votes on all private member's legislation," he said.

Hard to believe this is happening again, but it sure looks like it is.

I didn't think Toronto would allow a westerner to take the reigns of power. :unsure:

An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't.

Anatole France

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Tough issues plague Tories

By GREG WESTON, Sun Media

 

Ka-boom! A mushroom cloud is suddenly gathering over the Conservative Party's otherwise shining election campaign after Stephen Harper detonated what political strategists appropriately call Canada's "A-bomb" issue -- abortion.

Too bad for him that Ground Zero was under his feet.

Harper made it clear yesterday a Tory government would allow free votes on any abortion bills put before Parliament by individual MPs, and would do nothing to stop that kind of legislation from reaching the Commons.

The same hands-off approach to so-called private member's bills would also apply to capital punishment, he said.

Add this to Harper's pledge to hold a free vote on same-sex marriage, and the election suddenly includes all three of the country's hottest hot-button social issues.

Oh, swell.

Whether the new Conservative Party has been outed as the Canadian Alliance reincarnate or Harper was unfairly sandbagged remains to be seen.

Either way, the fallout has the potential to inflict all manner of damage on the Tory campaign.

As reporters waited for Harper to land at Hamilton airport in a TV helicopter, a gay rights protester was handing out playful cards that read: "No Homos."

Why did Harper have to get involved in this can of worms? :angry:

An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't.

Anatole France

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is allowing democratically elected officials to determine law in Canada considered radical? Amazing! Instead we want allow a bunch of appointed elitists to determine our fate.

Bravo to Harper! At least he's got the guts to make a stand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why did Harper have to get involved in this can of worms?

Because he is a person that still sticks to his personal beliefs. As very clearly stated, it would be a free vote on these issues, majority rules. It would be up to the constituents to tell their MP's which way to vote on these matters. I have no problem seeing these sorts of bills get voted on as long as it is a free vote, not the current dictatorship style voting we have now. All votes shoulld be free votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong answer. Very few people in Canada want to reopen issues such as abortion. I just saw pictures of a questioner at a Harper campaign rally being punched by a Harper supporter. This does not not look good at all for the Conservatives, and may be the issue that turns the campaign around for the Liberals. ;)

An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't.

Anatole France

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong answer. Very few people in Canada want to reopen issues such as abortion. I just saw pictures of a questioner at a Harper campaign rally being punched by a Harper supporter. This does not not look good at all for the Conservatives, and may be the issue that turns the campaign around for the Liberals.  ;)

And the question was? Democracy? You know, Martin talks about a "democratic deficit" and a lot of Canadians, including most on this group, want more freedom for MPs, but the moment someone proposes actually giving it to them people (well, some people, and the media) get all upset.

Let's look at abortion. Is a free vote going to ban abortion? Not bloody likely. Maybe half the Tories would vote for it, and a third of Liberals. All the BQ and NDP would vote against it (not much democracy in those parties). And that would be that. So why are the politically correct so upset?

Because the left despises democracy. The left is made up of intensely arrogant people who believe they know best - for everyone - on every issue, and feel almost religious about their particular decisions. They loath the thought of people actually debating it, much less getting to vote on it in the same way the Pope would loath the idea of Catholics getting to vote on his interpretations of Christian theology.

Jack Layton summed it up very well when the issue of same-sex marriage arose. "You vote with us or you get out of the party". There is no room for individual decisions of conscience or voting the wishes of your constituents in the NDP. You have to subscribe to the party's view on each and every issue and hold rigidly to that rigidly. Any deviation and you're excommunicated from the holy communion with the socialist church.

So along comes Harper saying MPs should be able to have free votes on issues like this and the left is all agog in horror and disbelief.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Argus....maybe if we had a democracy where everyone felt represented.

How many majority governments have we had in Canada with the governing party obtaining only 38-42% of the vote of the people that voted, which last time was approximately 60% of eligible voters?

We don't have a representative democracy in Canada and the sooner that issue gets addressed the better.

Anyway what right does any man have to decide on what a woman does with her body?

Fortunately thanks to Trudeau we now have a Charter of Rights to protect women.

Harper could go down on the abortion issue alone if he is not careful. ;)

An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't.

Anatole France

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be up to the constituents to tell their MP's which way to vote on these matters.

That's exactly what the constituents will do on 28 June but in a slightly more certain way than writing a letter.

It was inconceivable that Harper would get through the campaign without this issue coming up. I think he has handled it well. Perhaps he should have tried to avoid the "free vote" reference and said "status quo" instead but the Liberals or other scaremongerers would have got him some other way.

By the way, about 65% of Canadians believe that an abortion should be the sole choice of a woman in consultation with her doctor.

Gallup on Abortion

I obtained the reference to that Gallup site from this Pro-Life web site.

IOW, there is a fairly strong social consensus on abortion in Canada.

Elections are won and lost on a whole host of issues. Voters have to weigh, for example, financial scandals, fiscal policies, credibility and social policies. It ain't over until it's over.

-------

On a related matter, La Presse is trying to suggest Harper would be a hardliner in any negotiation on Quebec independence. In fact, as the article below makes clear, he avoided the question. (Once, when repeatedly pressed, Trudeau shrugged and gave the best answer to all these types of questions: "Well, I suppose somebody would have to negotiate but it won't be me.")

La Presse and Harper on Quebec Independence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the left despises democracy. The left is made up of intensely arrogant people who believe they know best - for everyone - on every issue, and feel almost religious about their particular decisions. They loath the thought of people actually debating it, much less getting to vote on it in the same way the Pope would loath the idea of Catholics getting to vote on his interpretations of Christian theology.

If Commons held a free vote and passed a law institutionalizing racial segregation, would you hail it as a victory for democracy?

What you forget is that one of the bedrock principles of democracy entails protection of minorities from the tyranny of the majority. Just because a certain viewpoint is endorsed by the majority doesn't mean its the right one for the government to adopt.

America...."the worlds largest, best-armed shopping mall."-Ivor Tossell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harper as done very well so far, he just needs to keep on message and not allow the media to take him of focus. When they ask a question about something like abortion say one thing about it and if they keep asking keep saying the same thing. These stories have turn out to be one or two day headlines and have yet to survive the weekend. The Liberals efforts to trash him have not worked and they will not work again. Unlike Day Harper can handle the media and he himself has not missteped, as long as doesnt misstep the CPC campaign will continue to make progress.

Most of this stuff will not last the weekend which is good for Harper, with events such as the CPC platform and the D-day events. The Martin platform seems to have been a floop, recyling the same promises the Liberals have been promising election after election and creating no interest among the average voter.

Harper can enter next week with a clean slate and controling the agenda. All he needs to do is keep on message, hammer the Liberals on the mismangement of the government (something he as stop doing as of late)and don't play into the media game. With Martin out of the country this weekend and the CPC platform to be released Harper will be able to control the agenda going into next week.

For Harper so far so good. End of week 2 election 2004. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bravo to Harper! At least he's got the guts to make a stand.

Mised this earlier. Make a stand? On what? Harper has been bending over backwards to avoid being seen as making a stand. Instead, he keeps ducking behind "free votes" and mealy-mouthed non-denials. However, his party (like the back bencher calling for third party abortion counselling) and supporters (like the one who assaulted a heckler at a Harper rally yesterday) are more than happy to step up and show what the Cons are really about.

Unlike Day Harper can handle the media and he himself has not missteped, as long as doesnt misstep the CPC campaign will continue to make progress.

Harper has been getting a free ride up until the past couple of days. As long as the Cons were een as teh tax-cut party, the media was happy to go along for the ride. But with the party's socially conservative base rising up to haunt Harper, the media's getting on him and he's starting to get frustrated. Frustrated, I suspect, becaus ethe non-answers he's been relying on won't hold up much longer and that if he steps out of line, it'll deal the party's chances a major blow.

America...."the worlds largest, best-armed shopping mall."-Ivor Tossell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Argus....maybe if we had a democracy where everyone felt represented.

How many majority governments have we had in Canada with the governing party obtaining only 38-42% of the vote of the people that voted, which last time was approximately 60% of eligible voters?

What exactly is representative democracy? I think on most issues the Liberals, and before them the PC, were pretty close to the mainstream of what the majority of people wanted on most major issues.

Let's examine the NDP. Now the NDP draws its support from all kinds of areas. People concerned about the environment, people who distrust capitalism and big business, people who believe they best represent visible minorities, gays, and the disabled, and their ambitions, or who believe they care more about the poor. Now suppose someone votes for the NDP principally because they are lower class and think the NDP is most likely to do something to help them. How does that support, that vote, convey a support for the NDP's same-sex marriage platform? Oh the voter was aware, but does that mean they support the NDP's rigid stance? Nope. Furthermore, unless that NDP MP won his or her riding in a landslide, the majority of voters didn't vote NDP at all.

So suppose you get your rep by pop situation and the NDP actually does get oh say 18% of the votes and 18% of House seats. Does that mean all the people who voted for them support same-sex marriage, abortion on demand, and no capital punishment? I don't think so. At the moment I'm leaning to the Conservative Party but that doesn't mean I support them on every issue.

The best situation in controversial social issues is to have a completely free vote and let the MPs respond to the desires of their constituents. But the NDP would never allow such a thing. As far as its concerned if you voted NDP then you voted to support their policies in their entirety.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the left despises democracy. The left is made up of intensely arrogant people who believe they know best - for everyone - on every issue, and feel almost religious about their particular decisions. They loath the thought of people actually debating it, much less getting to vote on it in the same way the Pope would loath the idea of Catholics getting to vote on his interpretations of Christian theology.

If Commons held a free vote and passed a law institutionalizing racial segregation, would you hail it as a victory for democracy?

If they were voting as their constituents wanted - yup. Democracy just says the people should decide. It doesn't absolutely require they make the right choice. ;)
What you forget is that one of the bedrock principles of democracy entails protection of minorities from the tyranny of the majority. Just because a certain viewpoint is endorsed by the majority doesn't mean its the right one for the government to adopt.
No, that's not actually true. You're mixing up the practice of democracy with the political beliefs of today's democratic nations. The US was a functioning democracy for some time while still keeping the institution of slavery alive. I believe the ancient Greeks kept slaves, too.

In any case, just because the people might make a bad choice is no reason to believe that their will should be superceded by politicians - who we know often make the wrong choice.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bravo to Harper! At least he's got the guts to make a stand.

Mised this earlier. Make a stand? On what? Harper has been bending over backwards to avoid being seen as making a stand. Instead, he keeps ducking behind "free votes" and mealy-mouthed non-denials. However, his party (like the back bencher calling for third party abortion counselling) and supporters (like the one who assaulted a heckler at a Harper rally yesterday) are more than happy to step up and show what the Cons are really about.

Unless I misremember, the old Reform Party voted down an attempt to put banning abortion in its platfom. I don't think anyone would argue that the present conservative party is not further towards the centre than the old Reform Party, so what makes anyone think that in a free vote even the majority of Conservatives would support banning abortion?

I think Harper has been fairly clear in that the party has a lot of people with a lot of different views on the issue, and as such they will not set a policy in stone that says aye or nay for abortion. In that way they mirror the general population, which is also severely divided on abortion. Let it be a free vote. What's wrong with that? I have more respect for that than with a party like the NDP which says flatly that it doesn't give a damn what the people think and that its MPs will vote for abortion on demand or be kicked out of the party.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't take my word that the Conservative campaign is being derailed with your social conservative views, take the word of someone who is a pro, an authority on these things:

The Tories are heading to götterdämmerung, yet again, with the social conservatism stuff. Harper keeps saying issues like abortion, capital punishment, equal marriage, etc. aren't part of his platform or agenda - but those same issues keep stepping all over his daily message. That's been happening every day for four days - ever since the Rob Merrifield bimbo eruption. But, hey, what do I know? It's not a big deal, really: all that the Tories potentially risk losing is every single female and youth vote in Canada. You can form a national government with a coalition of, um, angry white old guys, can't you? Can't you?

June 4, 2004

An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't.

Anatole France

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't take my word that the Conservative campaign is being derailed with your social conservative views, take the word of someone who is a pro, an authority on these things:
The Tories are heading to götterdämmerung, yet again, with the social conservatism stuff. Harper keeps saying issues like abortion, capital punishment, equal marriage, etc. aren't part of his platform or agenda - but those same issues keep stepping all over his daily message. That's been happening every day for four days - ever since the Rob Merrifield bimbo eruption. But, hey, what do I know? It's not a big deal, really: all that the Tories potentially risk losing is every single female and youth vote in Canada. You can form a national government with a coalition of, um, angry white old guys, can't you? Can't you?

June 4, 2004

Warren Kinsella!!!?? Not exactly an unbiased source there, Maple. The guy is one of the biggest, most two-faced political sleazes and whores in modern Canadian history.

Anyway, examine the gallup poll someone, I believe August, posted. The electorate is severely divided on the subject of abortion. You might not know this given the total unanimity among the media, of course. A lot of Canadians, perhaps half, want to see some restrictions. Me, I don't really care, but with so many people, presumably on the right side of the political spectrum, disliking the present total freedom for abortion the Tories might actually benefit from this. Remember that the people most outraged by the concept of restrictionis on abortions are also people who would never vote for them anyway. So the Conservatives don't have to care what they say or think.

If half the total electorate would like some restrictions on abortion what do you think the percentage would be only from that portion of the electorate who are considering voting Conservative? Certainly higher.

In any event, what has Harper said except that his government would not get involved in banning or restricting abortion, but that he would allow a free vote on a private members bill? Seems pretty straightforward to me. Let the peoples representatives make the decision. Let `em vote and have done with this issue.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minority rules does not define democracy. Women make up 52% of the population or something like that, so I would not fear putting it to a free vote in the house. Men are more likely to say women should have the right to choose. I can't find polling data to back up that claim (I've looked) but protecting unborn children doesn't seem a priority for men.

This is an issue that crosses party lines, put Bill Blakie, David Kilgour, and Stockwell Day in the same room and before long I believe you would have consensus on these so called divisive "hidden conservative agenda" issues.

Media is currently in panic mode and they will stop at nothing. I would like to encourage all conservatives to counter these hidden agenda claims.

The Stars editorial board have demanded that Harper make a promise not to introduce abortion legislation in any term he might serve. This was done after he said he would not introduce legislation in a first term but would not stop a private members bill. Can you imagine any other leader being asked to make promises about a second term long before he has earned a first?

The media will now focus on the so-called hidden-agenda and the campaign of fear starts in earnest.

They will also link Harper to past leaders instead of examining Matrins role in adscam. Ignoring that Harper has built a bigger party and can expect talent from Ontario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Men need to mind their own business on the abortion issue.

Or do the Conservatives really want to lose the election?

Better smarten up folks. ;)

An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't.

Anatole France

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you forget is that one of the bedrock principles of democracy entails protection of minorities from the tyranny of the majority. Just because a certain viewpoint is endorsed by the majority doesn't mean its the right one for the government to adopt.
This is not a bedrock principle of democracy but rather one of its grave weaknesses. It is the reason that some countries have very specific lists of rights.
If they were voting as their constituents wanted - yup. Democracy just says the people should decide. It doesn't absolutely require they make the right choice.
That argument is extreme. I am unaware of any democratic State that does not offer guarantees of protection to individuals.

Our protections against the State have been hard won. Do not assume them or dispense with them so easily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they were voting as their constituents wanted - yup. Democracy just says the people should decide. It doesn't absolutely require they make the right choice.

That's not democracy; that's mob rule.

No, that's not actually true. You're mixing up the practice of democracy with the political beliefs of today's democratic nations. The US was a functioning democracy for some time while still keeping the institution of slavery alive. I believe the ancient Greeks kept slaves, too.

By the modern practical definition of democracy, any country that denies a segment of its population the same rights and fredoms as the majority, even if by majority consent, cannot realistically be termed a democracy.

Men are more likely to say women should have the right to choose. I can't find polling data to back up that claim (I've looked) but protecting unborn children doesn't seem a priority for men.

Bull crap. Abortion is a women's issue. Every significant abortion crusader, and the vast majority of thos eon the frontlines of the fight to retain a women's right to choose are women.

America...."the worlds largest, best-armed shopping mall."-Ivor Tossell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW Warren Kinsella has contributed finacially to both a New Democratic and a Conservative candidate's campaign in this election.

I thought Trudeau/Canada's Charter of Rights guarantees certain protections for individuals, or am I incorrect? :rolleyes:

An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't.

Anatole France

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this plan of harpers is as old as conservatism!

if the conservatives were left to ride on their economic policies then only the richest 10% would ever vote for them!

they need the votes of those people who have strong religious or personal convictions regarding liberal ideas surrounding abortion, gay rights etc. etc! harper has no plans to personally implement any of those ideas(as stated)! he could probably care less about such issues... but he must portray a front to get the vote of these individuals who are willing to sacrifice their economic power for these ideals!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Men need to mind their own business on the abortion issue.

Or do the Conservatives really want to lose the election?

Better smarten up folks. ;)

Why should men have no say on the subject of abortion? Does the law not say they are responsible for any children born? If they are responsible then they ought to have a say in legislation which will decide, in some cases, whether or not children are born.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...